This is both my personal learning project and my contribution in the struggle to confront the ongoing Republican/ libertarian assault on rational science and constructive learning, as manifested in their malicious strategic Attacks on Science ~ A collection of articles, scientific resources, plus my own essays and indepth critique of various presentations from unidirectional-skeptics ~ Hopefully a resource for the busy, yet discerning, student who's concerned about the health of our Earth

Pages

Saturday, January 7, 2017

It didn’t take long for EM to get around to our economy as some sort of justification for ignoring the seriousness of what we are doing to our global life supporting climate system. What confuses me EM, how the hell is ignoring an imminent destructive threat going to help economic sustainability? What world will we be handing over to our children the next few decades? Doesn’t that concern you at all?

If you or anyone else could explain how that train of Republican logic works, I sure would appreciate a lesson.

The other point I will touch on in this installment is EM’s refusal to recognize the deliberate and strategic Republican attack on serious science. But first let me jump ahead for a moment to EM’s key sentence.

________________________________________________

"me not wanting to cripple the national economy"

EM, have you never thought about how much weather impacts every aspect of the things that make our lives and economy hum?

Our society and the biosphere that sustains us developed under the current climate regime - cranking up our atmospheric insulation, warming up and energizing our climate engine, think simple unavoidable physics, no way around it, we are already facing the cascading consequences of increasingly extreme wind and rain extremes, long lived heat ‘domes’ and droughts, followed by torrential downpours that can be more damaging than the withering drought was. But, not just heat, also localized extreme cold events because of warm air mass excursions into the Arctic which in turn displaces the frigid Arctic air mass which blows down into temperate zones, a product of our planet’s Jet Streams, which are getting more meandering and erratic with every year on account of various geophysical changes over the past decades due to global warming.

Okay, now we'll go back and pick it up where the seventh installment ended.

______________________________________________________

Quoting CC: : “You have provided me another excellent vehicle to examine the subtle dishonest rhetorical game that the Republican PR machine broadcasts through thousands of astro-turfed mouthpieces. It brings me back to what this blog was all about before the 11/8/16 catastrophe and I thank you for that opportunity.”

EM responds: Not sure exactly what the “Republican PR machine” has to do with climate-system modeling.(1) And no, I don’t agree with the shit that is spewed from the mouths of people who claim that AGW doesn’t exist, because I’m not fucking stupid.(2) Me not wanting to cripple the national economy has absolutely zero to do with not believing in AGW or the “Republican PR machine”.(3) It has to do with a basic understanding of economics and government’s role in society.(4)

_____________________________

(1) Republicans have nothing to do with climate modeling, but everything to do with spending millions to confuse and stupefy the public and leaders about climate models. Bottomline: ignore all that climate models get right equals base dishonesty, plain and simple.

The conservative media has fueled this confusion by distorting scientific research, hyping faux-scandals, and giving voice to groups funded by industries that have a financial interest in blocking action on climate change.

Meanwhile, mainstream media outlets have shied away from the "controversy" over climate change and have failed to press U.S. policymakers on how they will address this global threat. When climate change is discussed, mainstream outlets sometimes strive for a falsebalance that elevates marginal voices and enables them to sow doubt about the science even in the face of mounting evidence.

•The Greening Earth Society: Founded in the late 80’s by Western Fuels - a coal fired power lobby representing numerous corporations—to promote the claim that increasing greenhouse gases are good for the earth. …

•The Science & Environmental Policy Project (SEPP): Founded in the early 90’s by S. Fred Singer with seed capital and office space provided by the Unification Church (the “Moonies”). Today SEPP’s funding has come mainly from the fossil fuel industry and various Far-Right foundations including the Bradley, Smith Richardson, and Forbes foundations. …

•The Global Climate Coalition (GCC): Founded in 1989 by 46 corporations and trade associations representing a number of industries, but mainly auto manufacturers and fossil fuels. …

•The Information Council on the Environment (ICE): Founded in 1991 the National Coal Association, Western Fuels, and Edison Electric—all coal or coal-fired power lobbies. …

Astroturf fronts have stridently denied that mainstream scientific consensus supports global warming. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) which represents mainstream views one of their favorite targets. Whereas the IPCC represents over 2000 scientists, virtually all of which are published contributors in fields relevant to climate science and global warming mitigation, astroturf fronts have relied exclusively on a handful of consultants (one to two dozen at most). Of these, the lion’s share of the actual “science” consulting has been restricted to the following;

•S. Fred Singer: A professor of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia and of “Humane Studies” at George Mason University. recruited, and funded, by the fossil fuels, coal, auto, and tobacco industries. …

•Patrick Michaels: Also a professor of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia, …

•Robert Balling: Director of the Office of Climatology at Arizona State University. …

•Sallie Baliunas: An astrophysicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, …

•Sherwood Idso: Another astrophysicist with Harvard-Smithsonian …

•Richard Lindzen: Sloan professor of atmospheric sciences at M.I.T.

•John Christy: Director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH) and the Alabama State Climatologist. …

A historical table of U.S. Billion-dollar disaster events, summaries, report links and statistics for the 1980–2016 period of record. In 2016 (as of September), there have been 12 weather and climate disaster events with losses exceeding $1 billion each across the United States. These events included 4 flooding events and 8 severe storm events. Overall, these events resulted in the deaths of 68 people and had significant economic effects on the areas impacted.

EM, I fear you might be one of those people who’s never thought about how much weather impacts every aspect of the things that make our economy and lives hum. I beg you to look beyond your blindspot.

The following stuff and more is already happening, ignoring it guarantees a couple things.Continuing to do nothing is going to make it as extreme and bad as possible for our children.

But perhaps more importantly by filling so many people with deluded nonsense and contrived enemies - they won’t be prepared for these impacts that are coming, ignore them or not.I mean you have people in Miami investing life savings into building projects and looking at thirty year returns.It’s pathetic, but that’s what lies at the end of your glib attitude.

Here's some food for thought about the interface between the weather and our economy:

Impacts of Extreme Weather on Transportation: National Symposium Summary

Over the past several years, extreme weather has disrupted transportation systems in nearly every region of the United States. Derechos, snow storms, and intense hurricanes have plagued the east coast, while the Midwest has suffered massive and prolonged flooding.

In the southwest, dust storms and wildfires have forced extended road closures and endangered drivers. Transportation agencies have decades of experience managing weather variability and are able to quickly and efficiently handle common weather disruptions. However, many state transportation officials are now managing disruptions from more frequent and intense events.

Extreme and high impact weather events disrupt service, damage expensive infrastructure, and necessitate more frequent maintenance. Transportation agencies must manage both the rising costs of extreme weather as well as the public’s expectation of rapid transportation system recovery following these events.

In recognition of the extreme weather event challenges facing state transportation officials, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) sponsored a two- day symposium in May of 2013 entitled, National Symposium: Impacts of Extreme Weather Events on Transportation. …

______________________________________

Transportation System Resilience, Extreme Weather and Climate Change: A Thought Leadership Series

Drought affects all parts of our environment and our communities. The many different drought impacts are often grouped as “economic,” “environmental,” and “social” impacts. All of these impacts must be considered in planning for and responding to drought conditions.

(4)“It has to do with a basic understanding of economics and government’s role in society.”

How about some basic understanding of how much we are dependent on the sorts of moderate predictable weather patterns we used to know. How about acknowledging that climate scientists know way more than they don’t know about our climate system operates?

Besides, if you paid any attention to the information offered above, you’d understand that Earth’s physical indicators are all in agreement with what the scientists have been telling us all along.

I wish Republicans could put aside and outgrow their juvenile self-serving and oh so two-dimensional grasp of our planet’s physical processes. But that would require Republicans to be willing to try some honestly and good-faith learning (rather than faith-based self-certain exclusion).

Now, I wonder EM, can you explain to me why you think it makes economic sense to ignore the reality of our changing weather systems and what’s causing it?

________________________________________________

Quoting CC: “Nonsense! The right wing media machine is saturated with people denying the fundamentals of AGW. Just need to google it, or try YouTube for hundreds of real zingers. {This deception is the first “tell” that we are dealing with a disingenuous individual.}”

E.M. responds: Disingenuous? Okay, but even still, MOST (not all) rational individuals, whether they believe that we should dramatically reduce emissions or not at all, believe that the Earth is warming and that this warming can be contributed to human carbon emissions.{CC notes: Too bad your Republican pals disagree with you on that. See the following links}. Yeah, some people tell themselves that AGW doesn’t exist, and they often have loud mouths. This doesn’t mean, however, that everyone (Republicans, Libertarians, the fucking Whig party; it doesn’t really matter what label you attach), who doesn’t believe that government market intervention is the way to solve the issue is a liar, a schemer, or a societal-parasite.{CC notes: That’s not what we’re discussing! I’m saying they are deliberately deluding themselves about our planet’s physical realities and how that impacts everything to do with our economy and lives! How to deal with it is a whole other impossible subject, at least until everyone gets on the same page as to what’s going on.}. It means they have a different opinion on how to deal with the issue.{CC notes: Nope! It means they are foolishly self-certain, and lying to themselves. And making a mistake that will help turn our planet into a living nightmare for humans within decades! It already has for many.} Or maybe they don’t want to address the issue, but that doesn’t make supply-side social and economic theorists “climate-deniers”.{CC notes: Deniers or deluded, same thing. Rejecting what serious scientists have to tell us, in favor of what a bunch of politicized and transparent PR pimps tell you? Come on, that’s as stupid as voting for Trump because one believes what he’s telling us. ~~~ Oh and supply-side social/economic theory. Tell me about it, endless increasing profits and consumption on a finite planet. Why am I not impressed? Think about it.}

_______________________________________________

Era of climate science denial is not over, study finds

Conservative thinktanks in the US engaging in climate change have increased their attacks on science in recent years, a study of 16,000 documents finds.

… a new study that has looked at 15 years worth of output from 19 conservative “thinktanks” in the United States.

“We find little support for the claim that ‘the era of science denial is over’ - instead, discussion of climate science has generally increased over the sample period,” the study concludes.

The conservative thinktanks under the microscope are the main cog in the machinery of climate science denial across the globe, pushing a constant stream of material into the public domain.

The study, published in the journal Global Environmental Change, analysed more than 16,000 documents published online between 1998 and 2013 by mainly US groups like the Heartland Institute, the Cato Institute and the American Enterprise Institute. …

On Wednesday, Barton cemented that reputation by citing the Old Testament to refute scientific evidence of man-made global warming, drawing on the story of Noah's ark.

"I would point out that if you are a believer in the Bible, one would have to say the great flood was an example of climate change," Barton told a congressional hearing on Wednesday in a video first shown on the Buzzfeed website. "That certainly wasn't because mankind had overdeveloped hydrocarbon energy."

During last fall’s midterm election campaign, “I’m not a scientist” became a standard Republican answer to questions about climate change. The line seemed to invite parody, and Stephen Colbert (among others) obliged. He played clips of House Speaker John Boehner, then Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, and Florida Governor Rick Scott all offering, more or less word for word, the same refrain. “Everyone who denies climate change has the same stirring message,” Colbert observed. “ ‘We don’t know what the fuck we’re talking about.’ ”

The line worked—or, at least, didn’t not work—and Republicans won both houses of Congress. Now, it seems, they are trying to go one better. They are trying to prevent even scientists from being scientists.

Last week, the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, headed by Texas Republican Lamar Smith, approved a bill that would slash at least three hundred million dollars from nasa’s earth-science budget. …

All told, 170 elected representatives in the 114th Congress have taken over $63.8 million from the fossil fuel industry that’s driving the carbon emissions which cause climate change. They deny what over 97 percent of scientists say is happening — current human activity creates the greenhouse gas emissions that trap heat within the atmosphere and cause climate change. And their constituents are paying the price, with Americans across the nation suffering 500 climate-related national disaster declarations since 2011.

RECOMMENDED WEBSITES

11/29/2016 I started this blog to debate climate science contrarians, I've done my part, they, the intellectual cowards for their part have run off and hide within their hermetically sealed echo chambers, safe to continue broadcasting more stupidity mixed with anger and hostility rather than constructive learning.

Now this horrendous election. Its changed everything and this blog, not sure where it's going, eventually I need to start another one, one less intent on futility reaching out for what ain't there and more focused on presenting a different perspective for its own sake, and to hell with the rest of it, it's too heart breaking.

I see Dec 19th as a key date. If there isn't serious focused engagement of the public in numbers that surprise everyone, well the oligarch will have their way with us.

Americans need to let Trump know from the gitgo, we do not approve of his con job and he better not get too crazy because he's earned zero good faith or honeymoon considerations. We shall see.

{edited 12/11/2014}

I know there are too many typos, what can I say, eyes aren't what they were, I get rushed, and always did have a thing with transposing…{well, I also hated high school "english" classes... bad call that one.}. Doing the best I can with what I got. Embarrassing though it is, it's better than doing nothing. Besides, it's the issues and reasoning that we should be worrying about.

Though I'm in my own little world here, I'm also constantly learning and evolving and do get occasional feedback and when I reread stuff and find errors or omissions or garbage, I fix it. If it's major I'll acknowledge it with an 'edited' note, minor stuff I don't bother.

~ ~ ~

I hardly keep track of Anthony's latest antics (besides, with Sou on the job why bother - can't beat her insights). It's just me over here and I have more important things to do with my precious hours - still now that Anthony's luster has been wearing thin he's put his energy into discovering and honing new fresh faces to carry on the public show of the Republican/Libertarian strategic attack on science.

He seems to have transitioned into a ring-leader, perhaps mentor/coach would be better, producer? At least that's how Mr. Steele and his antics of the past year has gotten me to think about it. So in that regard this blog remains about WUWT's brand of thinking and logic and my struggle to understand the anatomy of the fraud they've perpetrated against mankind. {December 2014}

_____________________________

ok, now some recommended websites:

This blog was started in April 2013 and is written by an actual scientist so it has a refreshingly serious objective air to it, plus he does a good clear job of explaining complex issues.

Tamino, an acknowledged statistical/mathematical expert of the highest order, at Open Mind also does an excellent job of holding Anthony’s feet to the fire with clearly explained facts and math. Check it out:http://tamino.wordpress.com~ ~ ~

And of course, there is the excellent, most up to date internet depository of climate studies and information for the non-expert public.

Then there's RealClimate.org the scientist's commentary site. Run by working climate scientists intended to help the interested public and journalists sort through the complexities of the climatology. They provide "quick response to developing stories and provide the context" that is too often missing from public media's depiction. {But, you better be serious and have some real science education/understanding under your belt if you want to keep up.}

I remember back in da day, good websites/blogs were few and far between. But over the past years that's been changing to the point that it's impossible to keep up with them all. Here's an incomplete, and long overdue addition to my above list: